<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Can In The Middle (CITM) Adapter	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/</link>
	<description>Automotive Adventures</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Apr 2024 19:29:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Admin_M		</title>
		<link>https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-8171</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Admin_M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Apr 2024 19:29:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/?p=1233#comment-8171</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-8170&quot;&gt;Bill400&lt;/a&gt;.

Hi Bill, X150 pre-dates all of the LR electrical architectures I know. As I understand it, the X150 would have been developed by Jaguar very much under the ownership of Ford (Jaguar was bought by Ford in &#039;89, moved to PAG in &#039;99 (Land Rover joined in &#039;00), and JLR formed in &#039;07. The original XK launched in 2005, but would have been project planned during 2000/2001 before Land Rover entered PAG. In the early days of PAG (and some would say even today), Jaguar and Land Rover would have been kept very separate. So while I largely write about Land Rover in the JLR era, you pretty much have a Jaguar with origins in the FORD era. I don&#039;t really have knowledge of pre-X250 cars, but I suspect we would need to look at other 2000 Ford-era cars to find out if other vehicles send CCF on 0x400 and 0x407. Maybe X200? or perhaps X400 and the CD132 platform?
You probably can use the CITM to map between the X152 0X407 and the X250 0X401, but I doubt there would be a direct correlation. It could take years to map out the FORD CCF structure!

Hope that helps
M]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-8170">Bill400</a>.</p>
<p>Hi Bill, X150 pre-dates all of the LR electrical architectures I know. As I understand it, the X150 would have been developed by Jaguar very much under the ownership of Ford (Jaguar was bought by Ford in &#8217;89, moved to PAG in &#8217;99 (Land Rover joined in &#8217;00), and JLR formed in &#8217;07. The original XK launched in 2005, but would have been project planned during 2000/2001 before Land Rover entered PAG. In the early days of PAG (and some would say even today), Jaguar and Land Rover would have been kept very separate. So while I largely write about Land Rover in the JLR era, you pretty much have a Jaguar with origins in the FORD era. I don&#8217;t really have knowledge of pre-X250 cars, but I suspect we would need to look at other 2000 Ford-era cars to find out if other vehicles send CCF on 0x400 and 0x407. Maybe X200? or perhaps X400 and the CD132 platform?<br />
You probably can use the CITM to map between the X152 0X407 and the X250 0X401, but I doubt there would be a direct correlation. It could take years to map out the FORD CCF structure!</p>
<p>Hope that helps<br />
M</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Bill400		</title>
		<link>https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-8170</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bill400]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Apr 2024 18:57:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/?p=1233#comment-8170</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[M_ , It appears that JLR may have used different CCF node IDs to &quot;differentiate&quot; models. My X150 uses 400 and 407. The X250 is said to use 401 and 402. 
Do you know of another JLR model that may use 400 and 407? If not, maybe use your CITM as translator between the X150 and X250 parts?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>M_ , It appears that JLR may have used different CCF node IDs to &#8220;differentiate&#8221; models. My X150 uses 400 and 407. The X250 is said to use 401 and 402.<br />
Do you know of another JLR model that may use 400 and 407? If not, maybe use your CITM as translator between the X150 and X250 parts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Admin_M		</title>
		<link>https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-8166</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Admin_M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Mar 2024 20:16:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/?p=1233#comment-8166</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-8165&quot;&gt;Bill Crodick&lt;/a&gt;.

Oh, wow, that is incredibly generous. Thank you Bill, that means a lot to me!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-8165">Bill Crodick</a>.</p>
<p>Oh, wow, that is incredibly generous. Thank you Bill, that means a lot to me!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Bill Crodick		</title>
		<link>https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-8165</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bill Crodick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Mar 2024 06:51:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/?p=1233#comment-8165</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-5025&quot;&gt;Admin_M&lt;/a&gt;.

M, you have a gift for communication, instruction.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-5025">Admin_M</a>.</p>
<p>M, you have a gift for communication, instruction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Admin_M		</title>
		<link>https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-5025</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Admin_M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2022 07:31:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/?p=1233#comment-5025</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-5005&quot;&gt;Kev&lt;/a&gt;.

First off, apologies, the VIN is in Blk2 and has the address 0x401 (not 400 like I mentioned of FL2 forum)

Generally, the model year seems to have little or no impact on the FL2, certainly not on the multimedia components. The brand and vehicle type have a much greater impact. The model year is used by the SDD tool to identify the correct software that should be used by certain vehicles. It is quite common for hardware change to be introduced at model years which need specific software, so the CCF model year is one way to identify these. Personally, it&#039;s not something I would change and then use SDD to update software as it will create chaos. 

I&#039;ll reply to your email now

M]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-5005">Kev</a>.</p>
<p>First off, apologies, the VIN is in Blk2 and has the address 0x401 (not 400 like I mentioned of FL2 forum)</p>
<p>Generally, the model year seems to have little or no impact on the FL2, certainly not on the multimedia components. The brand and vehicle type have a much greater impact. The model year is used by the SDD tool to identify the correct software that should be used by certain vehicles. It is quite common for hardware change to be introduced at model years which need specific software, so the CCF model year is one way to identify these. Personally, it&#8217;s not something I would change and then use SDD to update software as it will create chaos. </p>
<p>I&#8217;ll reply to your email now</p>
<p>M</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Kev		</title>
		<link>https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/can-in-the-middle-citm-adapter/#comment-5005</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kev]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2022 13:10:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://bxproject.co.uk/blog/?p=1233#comment-5005</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve read all your posts about CANbus, all are very interesting, especially for me the insight into finding 2nd parts and connecting to them with a captured bus play back.
Looking at your code in Github it is interesting that your commented out line for 0x400 initially read 0x0B for the model, my FL2 MY2014 SE TECH Manual has 0x08 it makes me wonder what the difference is, maybe extra / less funtions.
ID	400_01	8	01	08	02	02	01	0B	02	02]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve read all your posts about CANbus, all are very interesting, especially for me the insight into finding 2nd parts and connecting to them with a captured bus play back.<br />
Looking at your code in Github it is interesting that your commented out line for 0x400 initially read 0x0B for the model, my FL2 MY2014 SE TECH Manual has 0x08 it makes me wonder what the difference is, maybe extra / less funtions.<br />
ID	400_01	8	01	08	02	02	01	0B	02	02</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
